eHam

eHam Forums => Contesting => Topic started by: K4TPC on March 14, 2014, 04:00:28 PM



Title: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: K4TPC on March 14, 2014, 04:00:28 PM
My transceiver has a built-in voice recorder that can playback a recording at the press of a button while transmitting. Is it okay to use a voice recorder playback when calling CQ during a contest? I'm interested what other contest hams think about this idea.


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: K0IZ on March 14, 2014, 06:37:19 PM
Done all the time.  Saves your voice. 


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: KS2G on March 15, 2014, 10:00:48 AM
My transceiver has a built-in voice recorder that can playback a recording at the press of a button while transmitting. Is it okay to use a voice recorder playback when calling CQ during a contest? I'm interested what other contest hams think about this idea.

It's quite common to use either an internal or external "voice keyer" not only to call CQ, but to conduct nearly all of or even an entire contest contact.

For example, my Kenwood TS-590S has the capability to transmit four different messages -- which I record as:
     #1 -- CQ
     #2 -- The contest exchange
     #3 -- Thank You, QRZ? and My Call.
     #4 -- My Call

When "Running" -- I send message #1 to call CQ. When a station answers, I say his call into the mic then send message #2 for the exchange. After I receive his exchange, I send message #3 to complete the contact, and if I don't get an immediate response I send message #1 to resume calling CQ.

When doing Search-and-Pounce, when I hear a station I want to work, I send message #4 (My Call), and when he answers I sent message #2 (Contest Exchange) to complete the contact without ever saying a word into the mic.  :)


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: K1DA on March 15, 2014, 02:47:33 PM
Lot of people I hear using these tapes sound like they had their 'nads removed. 


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: N4KZ on March 16, 2014, 02:41:58 PM
Doing this will keep you from being hoarse Monday morning. Contesters use digital voice recorders all the time for this very purpose. In fact, I use the DVR in my I com every day to call regular CQs. Audio quality is excellent. If calling CQ on a "dead band," using the DVR is the only way to go.

73, N4KZ


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: K5TED on March 17, 2014, 06:59:29 PM
I use it a lot in pileups.


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: N0FPE on March 19, 2014, 05:13:26 AM
Want to hear the use/overuse of a DVR? Listen to 28425 sometime...



Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: W4HLN on March 26, 2014, 07:00:00 PM
Done all the time.  Saves your voice. 


Ditto!   Works well!


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: WA7PRC on April 05, 2014, 10:37:04 PM
It's quite common to use either an internal or external "voice keyer" not only to call CQ, but to conduct nearly all of or even an entire contest contact.

For example, my Kenwood TS-590S has the capability to transmit four different messages -- which I record as:
     #1 -- CQ
     #2 -- The contest exchange
     #3 -- Thank You, QRZ? and My Call.
     #4 -- My Call

When "Running" -- I send message #1 to call CQ. When a station answers, I say his call into the mic then send message #2 for the exchange. After I receive his exchange, I send message #3 to complete the contact, and if I don't get an immediate response I send message #1 to resume calling CQ.

When doing Search-and-Pounce, when I hear a station I want to work, I send message #4 (My Call), and when he answers I sent message #2 (Contest Exchange) to complete the contact without ever saying a word into the mic.  :)

A rig's built-in recorder/player is fine for casual use but, quickly leaves a lot to be desired for contest use.

Contest logging programs use the computer's sound card to play WAV files. When running a frequency, it's VERY handy to send the station's callsign back to him/her (so he/she knows you're responding to him/her).  When using WriteLog (http://www.writelog.com/), it will attempt to concatenate (splice together) sound files to build the other station's callsign.  Then, you just add the contest exchange. WL also can do a logic test on the other station's callsign.  If it's a dupe, WL can send your "Sorry OM, dupe!" message, or send the contest exchange if it's not a dupe. Some contest exchanges require sending an incremental serial number, which I don't believe a rig's internal voice keyer can do.  You'd still need to use the microphone. The above can be done in WL by programming just one of your PC's function keys.

With WL, I can nearly operate an entire fone contest w/o using the microphone. I used Audacity (http://audacity.sourceforge.net/) (free) to create/edit all the sound files.

vy 73,
Bryan WA7PRC


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: KI6LZ on April 05, 2014, 11:15:03 PM
Just a hint.

Dupes do not affect scoring. The time spent to say dupe is almost the same as reworking him. If one doesn't work the dupe and the dupe has your call wrong, you will penalized as not in his log.


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: KS2G on April 06, 2014, 02:16:12 PM
A rig's built-in recorder/player is fine for casual use but, quickly leaves a lot to be desired for contest use.

Contest logging programs use the computer's sound card to play WAV files. When running a frequency, it's VERY handy to send the station's callsign back to him/her (so he/she knows you're responding to him/her).  When using WriteLog (http://www.writelog.com/), it will attempt to concatenate (splice together) sound files to build the other station's callsign.  Then, you just add the contest exchange. WL also can do a logic test on the other station's callsign.  If it's a dupe, WL can send your "Sorry OM, dupe!" message, or send the contest exchange if it's not a dupe. Some contest exchanges require sending an incremental serial number, which I don't believe a rig's internal voice keyer can do.  You'd still need to use the microphone. The above can be done in WL by programming just one of your PC's function keys.

With WL, I can nearly operate an entire fone contest w/o using the microphone. I used Audacity (http://audacity.sourceforge.net/) (free) to create/edit all the sound files.

vy 73,
Bryan WA7PRC

The N1MM Contest Logger, which is what I use, has essentially the same capabilities.

The thing I don't like about basing the voice keyer function on WAV files is that you can't change the recorded messages "on the fly" as you can with an "internal" voice keyer (like the one in my '590) or  external devices (such as the MFJ-432 and 434 that I've also used).

Also, the result of creating callsigns and serial numbers by piecing together separate WAV files of the individual letters/numbers, or phonetics usually comes out sound exactly like that -- pieced together.

I find it easier/quicker/clearer to use the use the recordings for the repetitive part(s) of the exchange and speak into the mic for the part(s) that change -- like the worked station's callsign and serial number.

73,
Mel - KS2G



Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: WA7PRC on May 17, 2014, 05:02:24 PM
The N1MM Contest Logger, which is what I use, has essentially the same capabilities.

The thing I don't like about basing the voice keyer function on WAV files is that you can't change the recorded messages "on the fly" as you can with an "internal" voice keyer (like the one in my '590) or  external devices (such as the MFJ-432 and 434 that I've also used).

Also, the result of creating callsigns and serial numbers by piecing together separate WAV files of the individual letters/numbers, or phonetics usually comes out sound exactly like that -- pieced together.

I find it easier/quicker/clearer to use the use the recordings for the repetitive part(s) of the exchange and speak into the mic for the part(s) that change -- like the worked station's callsign and serial number.

73,
Mel - KS2G


I built the W2IHY DVK back in the 80s but have long-since tossed it onto the scrap pile and graduated to PC-based sound recording. Some time later, MFJ produced similar units.

It has worked fine for me for many years.  Key is in recording the files + processing them. I've received many compliments on how close to natural it sounds -- even though there are no points to be had for that.  ;)

vy 73,
Bryan WA7PRC


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: K5TED on May 19, 2014, 09:06:25 PM
The holy grail would be to have your shack run the contest for you while you're out for ice cream or whatever... sheesh.


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: WA7PRC on May 20, 2014, 04:34:04 PM
Quote
The holy grail would be to have your shack run the contest for you while you're out for ice cream or whatever... sheesh.

That would  be similar to watching a sporting event instead of participating, and would be not nearly as much fun. Sheesh.

vy 73 es gl,
Bryan WA7PRC

PS: Sarcasm noted.


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: AA4PB on May 20, 2014, 06:37:32 PM
Years ago I wrote a DOS program that automatically called CQ via an AMTOR TNC. If someone connected, it output a ringing sound from the PC speaker. If no answer after a couple of minutes it repeated the process. It was fun to let it run on 10M when the band appeared dead and I was busy around the shack. Several times I worked some good DX on the "dead" band.


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: N0IU on May 21, 2014, 03:47:34 AM
It was fun to let it run on 10M when the band appeared dead and I was busy around the shack. Several times I worked some good DX on the "dead" band.


Good lesson!

One of my Elmer's once told me that he had never heard to receivers talking to each other. At some point in time, someone has to transmit!


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: K6EK on May 21, 2014, 12:50:53 PM
Want to hear the use/overuse of a DVR? Listen to 28425 sometime...

You mean as in kilo-charlie-four.. etc ?




Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: RENTON481 on May 24, 2014, 05:34:28 AM
^^^^^ yeah, I think he's referring to the KC4 guy near Atlanta. I often hear his recording going non-stop on that 10 m frequency for what sometimes seems to be hours at a time.


Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: AB4D on May 25, 2014, 07:41:59 AM
Lot of people I hear using these tapes sound like they had their 'nads removed. 

I agree, however it's that type of audio that breaks through pile ups. I've heard Dxpedition ops thank others for running narrow audio.

I would say 75% of the big contest stations use recorders during contests. Especially, in the countries where English is not often spoken. It's common to hear DX stations using the recorder to make the basic exchange in English.  However, the operator then struggles to use English for any fills. 



Title: RE: Use of a recording when calling CQ
Post by: VK2LEE on September 06, 2014, 03:30:31 AM

I have used the Audio recording on My FT920 for Many years although Only for Calling "CQ Contest" or during a DXpedition where I give My callsign in Narrow audio.. other than that I still prefer to talk to My Radio...
but I'm not out to actually Win any contests these days..
I have been noticing for Many years of Badly recorded Callsigns during contests which make it difficult when you can't make out the call and enter it into the Log. These are usually from Non English speaking countries and the Recorded Callsign [if done correctly] would be Excellent... but alas How do you tell these stations about the problem??  Recently I have heard contest stations that their callsign has been clipped on the end, making it impossible again, for Me to understand .. So, the Audio recordings would be Excellent if they were done Correctly, but to hear the same recorded callsign which You cannot understand... over and over again... hoping that they might just press the Mike button just this one time... Hi hi.. So I then have to Ask what their callsign is...  It still amazes Me that these stations can keep working stations, that somehow do understand the recorded audio..

Lee  VK2LEE